not true - it's position of better together (& it's associated helpers) that a currency union won't happen, not policy, not official/final, just position of no campaign before any negotiation has happened ... just another of their 'no you can't have that' list grounded in a deliberate misunderstanding of what breaking union would mean!
all three major parties have categorically stated there will be no currency union , not that it will be subject to negotiation
I really don't understand why YES supporters that are so adamant they want nothing to do with Westminster and it can only be bad for Scotland are so desperate to be part of a currency union with them
unless of course its a lack of confidence in the Scottish economy should a YES vote be successful and they want to keep the safety net a currency union would provide. if the YES campaign is to be believed and the streets are gonna be paved with gold post independence then why do you want that safety net and to potentially be held back by the fiscal policies of the rest of the UK ?
all three major parties have categorically stated there will be no currency union , not that it will be subject to negotiation
I really don't understand why YES supporters that are so adamant they want nothing to do with Westminster and it can only be bad for Scotland are so desperate to be part of a currency union with them
unless of course its a lack of confidence in the Scottish economy should a YES vote be successful and they want to keep the safety net a currency union would provide. if the YES campaign is to be believed and the streets are gonna be paved with gold post independence then why do you want that safety net and to potentially be held back by the fiscal policies of the rest of the UK ?
Methinks they dont want to give the horses another scare, and it gives them a breathing space before Euro application kicks in then they drop the Pound and the Queen wrecking the rest of the UK economy. All under the illusion of continued normality of course.
Methinks they dont want to give the horses another scare, and it gives them a breathing space before Euro application kicks in then they drop the Pound and the Queen wrecking the rest of the UK economy. All under the illusion of continued normality of course.
Why would an Independent Scotland drop the Queen? From memory, England took on the Scottish Monarchy with James the sixth becoming James the first in England, so in essence the monarchy is more Scottish than English. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_VI_and_I
Why would an Independent Scotland drop the Queen? From memory, England took on the Scottish Monarchy with James the sixth becoming James the first in England, so in essence the monarchy is more Scottish than English. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_VI_and_I
Why would an Independent Scotland drop the Queen? From memory, England took on the Scottish Monarchy with James the sixth becoming James the first in England, so in essence the monarchy is more Scottish than English. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_VI_and_I
I think you might find the Morarchy is actually more German than British.
The point is that there are many that see the Referendum as a stepping stone to more radical reform.
Some here were saying that the current debate was 'Voter Friendly' and that the real policies would emerge after a Yes vote. Personally I can take or leave the monarchy but a wee bit of honesty might go along way here.
There is an underlying radical left wing agenda to do with Independence that doesnt sit too well with my slightly right of centre way of thinking.
what manifesto? policy is to make no change while Queen is alive & perhaps have a referendum on monarchy some time in the future ... nothing fixed/decided as regards getting rid of monarchy
I really don't understand why YES supporters that are so adamant they want nothing to do with Westminster and it can only be bad for Scotland are so desperate to be part of a currency union with them
I think you will find that the Bank of England and Westminster are entirely seperate institutions with BoE having strict independence from govt.
I think you will find that the Bank of England and Westminster are entirely seperate institutions with BoE having strict independence from govt.
So independent that the governor is appointed by the chancellor. He will do the government's bidding whenever necessary, you would be mad to think otherwise.
So independent that the governor is appointed by the chancellor. He will do the government's bidding whenever necessary, you would be mad to think otherwise.
It does look that way, although Mark Carney could have done Westminster a favour by ruling out the currency union declaring it unworkable, but he didn't.
It does look that way, although Mark Carney could have done Westminster a favour by ruling out the currency union declaring it unworkable, but he didn't.
and if he had done so you would have been moaning about someone who is meant to be independent getting involved in a political decision ...
It does look that way, although Mark Carney could have done Westminster a favour by ruling out the currency union declaring it unworkable, but he didn't.
It's not Carney's call it's a political decision and it's been made - no CU.
Sturgeon says the documentary is bad for the no campaign while her government rubbishes the claims made against the yes campaign.
Can't have it both ways.
In this case you can -
If what is being reported is lies then it can be reported that it is 'rubbish' and by being lies it can harm the No campaign as they are being seen as trying to deceive.
So independent that the governor is appointed by the chancellor. He will do the government's bidding whenever necessary, you would be mad to think otherwise.
You'd be mad to not get the independence of the BoE.
The Financial Services Act (2012) established an independent Financial Policy Committee (FPC), a new prudential regulator as a subsidiary of the Bank, and created new responsibilities for the supervision of financial market infrastructure providers. The Financial Policy Committee (FPC) is charged with taking action to remove or reduce systemic risks with a view to protecting and enhancing the resilience of the UK financial system. The Committee has a secondary objective to support the economic policy of the Government.
So while the BoE is given a strategic direction of travel it is for the BoE to decide what tactical measures to take on a daily basis.
The Financial Services Act (2012) established an independent Financial Policy Committee (FPC), a new prudential regulator as a subsidiary of the Bank, and created new responsibilities for the supervision of financial market infrastructure providers. The Financial Policy Committee (FPC) is charged with taking action to remove or reduce systemic risks with a view to protecting and enhancing the resilience of the UK financial system. The Committee has a secondary objective to support the economic policy of the Government.
So while the BoE is given a strategic direction of travel it is for the BoE to decide what tactical measures to take on a daily basis.
The BoE is independent in name, but in reality...???
The Financial Services Act (2012) established an independent Financial Policy Committee (FPC), a new prudential regulator as a subsidiary of the Bank, and created new responsibilities for the supervision of financial market infrastructure providers. The Financial Policy Committee (FPC) is charged with taking action to remove or reduce systemic risks with a view to protecting and enhancing the resilience of the UK financial system. The Committee has a secondary objective to support the economic policy of the Government.
So while the BoE is given a strategic direction of travel it is for the BoE to decide what tactical measures to take on a daily basis.
If Scotland vote yes then they won't be part of the UK anymore, seems a lot of people have trouble coming to grips with this.
What a politician says in this parliament means jack. None of them (though unlikely) may be re-elected.
So what Balls, Osborne and Cable say now is moot.
Of course on the other side of the coin, if there is a yes, then if Labour got in they may not even ask for CU.
Unless you have been living on another planet you know the answer as well as I do there will be no CU.
And even the SNP having given up on their childish tantrum about bluff and bullying by stating that they wiil borrow several more billions they have accepted a CU is dead and buried.
However, staying in the UK guarantees a CU and given the state of the polls a continuing CU looks very likely indeed. ;-)
Channel 4 is government owned, ad supported --- just another cog in the machine
Channel 4 was launched on 2nd November 1982 with a unique business model, under the Broadcasting Act 1981. We are funded predominantly by advertising and sponsorship, but unlike other broadcasters such as ITV, Channel 4 is not shareholder owned. Channel 4 is a statutory corporation, independent of Government, and governed by a unitary board made up of executive and non-executive directors, who are responsible for ensuring that Channel 4 fulfils its remit and delivers its financial responsibilities. Non-executive directors are appointed by OFCOM in agreement with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. This system ensures our not-for-profit status; that we are held accountable and that all profit generated by our commercial activity is directly reinvested back into the delivery of our public service remit.
Channel 4 was launched on 2nd November 1982 with a unique business model, under the Broadcasting Act 1981. We are funded predominantly by advertising and sponsorship, but unlike other broadcasters such as ITV, Channel 4 is not shareholder owned. Channel 4 is a statutory corporation, independent of Government, and governed by a unitary board made up of executive and non-executive directors, who are responsible for ensuring that Channel 4 fulfils its remit and delivers its financial responsibilities. Non-executive directors are appointed by OFCOM in agreement with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. This system ensures our not-for-profit status; that we are held accountable and that all profit generated by our commercial activity is directly reinvested back into the delivery of our public service remit.
Thought it worth bringing this to your attention.
Thought you would have put this in bold -
-executive directors are appointed by OFCOM in agreement with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport.
The Board comprises up to six part-time Members, appointed by the Secretary of State for Culture Media and Sport, and up to four full-time executive members including the Chief Executive
Comments
all three major parties have categorically stated there will be no currency union , not that it will be subject to negotiation
I really don't understand why YES supporters that are so adamant they want nothing to do with Westminster and it can only be bad for Scotland are so desperate to be part of a currency union with them
unless of course its a lack of confidence in the Scottish economy should a YES vote be successful and they want to keep the safety net a currency union would provide. if the YES campaign is to be believed and the streets are gonna be paved with gold post independence then why do you want that safety net and to potentially be held back by the fiscal policies of the rest of the UK ?
Methinks they dont want to give the horses another scare, and it gives them a breathing space before Euro application kicks in then they drop the Pound and the Queen wrecking the rest of the UK economy. All under the illusion of continued normality of course.
Can't have it both ways.
Its in the SNP manifesto Queenie out!
I think you might find the Morarchy is actually more German than British.
The point is that there are many that see the Referendum as a stepping stone to more radical reform.
Some here were saying that the current debate was 'Voter Friendly' and that the real policies would emerge after a Yes vote. Personally I can take or leave the monarchy but a wee bit of honesty might go along way here.
There is an underlying radical left wing agenda to do with Independence that doesnt sit too well with my slightly right of centre way of thinking.
Haven't you unionists been telling us the SNP manifesto and the White Paper are one and the same, White Paper definitely says Queenie in.
I think you will find that the Bank of England and Westminster are entirely seperate institutions with BoE having strict independence from govt.
It does look that way, although Mark Carney could have done Westminster a favour by ruling out the currency union declaring it unworkable, but he didn't.
and if he had done so you would have been moaning about someone who is meant to be independent getting involved in a political decision ...
It's not Carney's call it's a political decision and it's been made - no CU.
In this case you can -
If what is being reported is lies then it can be reported that it is 'rubbish' and by being lies it can harm the No campaign as they are being seen as trying to deceive.
You'd be mad to not get the independence of the BoE.
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/about/Pages/default.aspx
The Financial Services Act (2012) established an independent Financial Policy Committee (FPC), a new prudential regulator as a subsidiary of the Bank, and created new responsibilities for the supervision of financial market infrastructure providers. The Financial Policy Committee (FPC) is charged with taking action to remove or reduce systemic risks with a view to protecting and enhancing the resilience of the UK financial system. The Committee has a secondary objective to support the economic policy of the Government.
So while the BoE is given a strategic direction of travel it is for the BoE to decide what tactical measures to take on a daily basis.
Has it?
What a politician says in this parliament means jack. None of them (though unlikely) may be re-elected.
So what Balls, Osborne and Cable say now is moot.
Of course on the other side of the coin, if there is a yes, then if Labour got in they may not even ask for CU.
Seems Professor of European Law at Oxford Uni has an opinion on this -
http://gallery.mailchimp.com/3d8f589fda4fb7526a70254d4/files/e3c82843-2a9f-41af-a4e3-de3eeec55737.pdf
HOW EASILY COULD AN INDEPENDENT
SCOTLAND JOIN THE EU?
SIONAIDH DOUGLAS-SCOTT
PROFESSOR OF EUROPEAN AND HUMAN RIGHTS LAW
UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD
Probably 5 million people have an opinion on it. There's not a single one of them knows more than anyone else.
The BoE is independent in name, but in reality...???
If Scotland vote yes then they won't be part of the UK anymore, seems a lot of people have trouble coming to grips with this.
Unless you have been living on another planet you know the answer as well as I do there will be no CU.
And even the SNP having given up on their childish tantrum about bluff and bullying by stating that they wiil borrow several more billions they have accepted a CU is dead and buried.
However, staying in the UK guarantees a CU and given the state of the polls a continuing CU looks very likely indeed. ;-)
Channel 4 was launched on 2nd November 1982 with a unique business model, under the Broadcasting Act 1981. We are funded predominantly by advertising and sponsorship, but unlike other broadcasters such as ITV, Channel 4 is not shareholder owned. Channel 4 is a statutory corporation, independent of Government, and governed by a unitary board made up of executive and non-executive directors, who are responsible for ensuring that Channel 4 fulfils its remit and delivers its financial responsibilities. Non-executive directors are appointed by OFCOM in agreement with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. This system ensures our not-for-profit status; that we are held accountable and that all profit generated by our commercial activity is directly reinvested back into the delivery of our public service remit.
Thought it worth bringing this to your attention.
Thought you would have put this in bold -
-executive directors are appointed by OFCOM in agreement with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport.
Hmmm. Who appoints OFCOM members?
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/about/how-ofcom-is-run/ofcom-board/board-procedures/
The Board comprises up to six part-time Members, appointed by the Secretary of State for Culture Media and Sport, and up to four full-time executive members including the Chief Executive
Yup, cogs in the machine!
Are you the future elected politician that has legislated on this?
Eh no.